From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D8AC433FE for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 06:45:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229511AbiJNGp4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 02:45:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54730 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229498AbiJNGpy (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 02:45:54 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3446F1578AA for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 23:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C440121E9A; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 06:45:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1665729950; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4stetO37DS8MDb8SRwH/wc0SYhyVFw055kNS/KnZ0bc=; b=IC+KPb6MYfqzeTWJo+bq/0aL4PEUci9WhYkHdraMXya8qWSs7ZGnrjvkJZb9tjmrJX20h/ OhsEwfynvp3ycODjqOVYuMzItMKh3z0+7V6wP4IykEREE50qTYqV/KLDutg9mzFpyo3zbV +ST+YWQJuToZ+wqmp6cPRjVQmiTSo4A= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1665729950; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4stetO37DS8MDb8SRwH/wc0SYhyVFw055kNS/KnZ0bc=; b=6L3mEdbCqfnTtujXcpRDqROtaMpX1PuifnzxSSuEpzzdpuui8d3O8qo93kgdZUctS6G+GA Nof3d4I9hXv0H5Ag== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91D4913451; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 06:45:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id SaHfIp4FSWPQQgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 06:45:50 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 08:45:50 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Subject: Re: hmm_test issues with latest mainline To: David Hildenbrand , Shuah Khan , Alex Sierra , Alistair Popple Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Ralph Campbell , Felix Kuehling , Christoph Hellwig , Jerome Glisse , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Shuah Khan References: <26017fe3-5ad7-6946-57db-e5ec48063ceb@suse.cz> <7e2e6679-3205-3540-f522-9eaed2940559@redhat.com> <44fcecda-31a4-7288-1848-63003dfe0a7d@linuxfoundation.org> <04114304-7b35-d42f-0155-087e3b6237c6@suse.cz> <0e02ace6-2fad-47d2-03b9-d8a46f256097@suse.cz> Content-Language: en-US From: Vlastimil Babka In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On 10/13/22 20:00, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>> When did that test start failing? Was it still ok for 6.0? >>> >>> Didn't test yet, will try, in case it's my system/config specific thing. >> >> So it's actually all the same with v6.0 for me. The infinite loops, the test >> failures, the misreported SKIPs. >> >> #  RUN           hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive ... >> # hmm-tests.c:1673:exclusive:Expected ret (-16) == 0 (0) >> hmm close returned (-1) fd is (3) >> # exclusive: Test failed at step #1 >> #          FAIL  hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive >> not ok 20 hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive >> #  RUN           hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_mprotect ... >> # hmm-tests.c:1727:exclusive_mprotect:Expected ret (-16) == 0 (0) >> hmm close returned (-1) fd is (3) >> # exclusive_mprotect: Test failed at step #1 >> #          FAIL  hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_mprotect >> not ok 21 hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_mprotect >> #  RUN           hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_cow ... >> # hmm-tests.c:1780:exclusive_cow:Expected ret (-16) == 0 (0) >> hmm close returned (-1) fd is (3) >> # exclusive_cow: Test failed at step #1 >> #          FAIL  hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_cow >> not ok 22 hmm.hmm_device_private.exclusive_cow >> > > Is the kernel compiled with support. I have the feeling that we might simply > miss kernel support and it's not handled gracefully ... If you mean CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE=y then it's there. Couldn't find anything relevant that wouldn't be enabled.